Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 9314279" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Here are some quick testimonial (via bullet points and strikethroughs signifying what agenda/design I'm not interested in) about myself as a GM that might do some work in helping distinguish between Trad, NeoTrad, Story Now, and Gamism.  This is not an indictment of Trad or NeoTrad play.  My hope is that it delivers some context for what people who want a NeoTrad play experience would want in terms of game engine, social contract, and participant duties and what would be kryptonite for those NeoTrad priorities.* Its very important to me that system have a robust and immutable "say" that cannot (and will not) be subverted by either player-side or GM-side railroading or Force.  Therefore, <s>Trad and NeoTrad</s>.* Its very important to me that "System's Say" (the premise of play, the superstructure of play, micro play loops, incentive structures/reward cycles, build/roster dynamics, resolution mechanics/techniques) persistently generates dynamic, unforeseeable play regarding (i) character, (ii) situation, and (iii) setting; system as metaplot (this includes character metaplot) kryptonite.  Consequently, every participant must "hold on lightly" to those i-iii and that fundamentally means eschewing preconceptions of play; everyone gives up some measure of control (to system and to each other as defined by system) in order to sustain curiosity and have that curiosity paid off in the blow-by-blow of play.  It is a no go to be precious about or possessive of anything beyond fulfilling your system-novel duties around pushing hard/putting your chips in as a protagonist and provoking/pushing back just as hard as opposition.  Therefore, <s>Trad and NeoTrad</s>.* I don't want to GM a game where either (a) the difficulty is medium to easy or (b) the system can be pretty trivially gamified such that you can trade out low stakes consequences for currency/means/fiat power to ensure high stakes consequences (those types of consequences that seriously perturb trajectories) never materialize.  Another version of this is there is so much player fiat power baked into the game engine/PC build dynamics and/or "writer's room" conceits express themselves with an eye toward generating outputs of play (contrast with players having huge and direct impacts upon the inputs of play exclusively) that nature and shape of climax and denouement are already significantly concretized prior to their actual happening.  In effect, this paradigm I'm envisioning here is a hallmark of proper, high-functioning systemization of <s>NeoTrad</s> priorities, participant duties, and game engine dynamics.</blockquote>

Verification